How is that? Voting is beginning your masters for changes (and, why should they listen? Where are the incentives?). You can only vote with your money. If you stop paying your ISP because your connection is crappy, and all your neighbors do the same - it goes bankrupt. Plain simple.
It might require adding yourself as alternative to the ballot (using the defined processes, not by writing yourself on the paper, which merely invalidates it).
I was considering getting myself on the ballot for some local elections if only to be able to vote for someone else but the two politicians that, from experience, are equally bad.
In the UK (probably other countries too) you have to put up a deposit, designed to prevent frivolous candidatures. I suppose if you can afford to lose your deposit it's not a bad way to protest; even better if you get more votes than the threshold amount!
In Germany you have to collect signatures from a certain sample of the electorate (typically 0.1%) with which they affirm that they want to see you on the ballot.
For municipal elections that's possible to achieve for an individual.
You should start with the question of why do you need someone to be in an office in the first place. And if the position is indeed so valuable and necessary, why can't you just hire and pay this person, instead of voting for him and asking him to take money out of you and others by force?
I would happily hire the leader of my choice, it's just that I don't have enough to pay him or her. Other people have money I could use, but they want to hire different people than I do. How to resolve all these differences? Voting.
You might also be shocked to learn that boards of directors, when considering candidates for CEO, usually resolve their differences by voting.
